On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 03:50:50AM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> Walter Landry <wlandry@ucsd.edu> writes:
>
> >> I am working on a piece of free software that makes extensive use of
> >> plugins, i.e. shared objects dynamically loaded at runtime. Many of
> >> these plugins are linked with third-party libraries. The licenses of
> >> those libraries vary, including at least GPL, LGPL and X11. Now I'm
> >> trying to work out what choices of license for my program would allow
> >> distribution of binaries, and also what would be DFSG-free. I'd
> >> appreciate some comments about these matters.
> >
> > If you choose any of those licenses (GPL, LGPL, X11), you should be
> > fine. There is no problem using those plugins with your program. So
> > the question comes down to which one you prefer for your own work.
>
> OK, say I use the X11 license. Now suppose someone installs a closed
> source plugin. Suppose it also happens that this same user has
> installed some GPL plugin. Both plugins would be allowed separately,
> right? When the user runs the program, it will load both plugins.
> Would this in some magical way make the plugins derived works of each
> other, thus violating the GPL?
No. But a vendor could get into trouble if they shipped both.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |